Thank you all for your feedback. We have heard your concerns and started a full review of the pools stratum code to ensure that we can rule out the possibility of an attacker exploiting a bug to submit fake or duplicate shares. After lots of tests we can rule out this assumption. Nevertheless we did use the opportunity to deploy some additional improvements to our stratum code both security and efficiency wise. Our mining servers can now handle the same amount of miners with just a fraction of the resources it used to require. This allows us, in case a server goes down, to quickly re-route mining to another server.
Security wise we did add a scalable IP blacklisting feature. This allowed us to quickly mitigate a fake share attack against the pool a few days ago.
The “-p diff” feature was disabled during the investigation and will be re-enabled it soon.
Also we have updated the pool to the latest Zcash 1.0.4 version and will soon start to test direct payouts to z addresses which will allow you to leverage the full potential of Zcash.
@peter_zcash Thanks so much for all the improvements! I know all about variance, but the pool sure looks to be running super now - it isn’t just “luck”.
Could you share with us the details of the pool’s payout? Specifically, how many confirms a block needs before the earnings are distributed? It may help some people clarify the difference between the pool mining a block and their unpaid balance being updated for that block. I know on ethermine.org you wait 10 confirms, I believe. Is it the same on flypool?
“The “-p diff” feature was disabled during the investigation and will be re-enabled it soon.”
Can’t wait for the “-p diff” to come back, since I’m submitting almost 11k shares an hour at the 2000 default. I know it helps the load on the pool, as well as the local miner, to have an appropriate diff for your hash rate.
“Also we have updated the pool to the latest Zcash 1.0.4 version and will soon start to test direct payouts to z addresses which will allow you to leverage the full potential of Zcash.”
If it tests out OK, is it at all possible to implement a seamless transition from our current t-address to a z-address, rather than having to abandon the t-address and start over with a new z-address pool account?
I’m repeating myself (a couple of posts back), but yes, the pool is running very well. My spreadsheet, that has proven very reliable for ETH and Zcash, says I should average a ZEC every 5hrs 45mins, and over the last 24 hours I’ve gotten one every 5hrs 38mins, on average.
Unfortunately payouts to z addresses will remain disabled for the time being. We have tested paying out directly to z address using the latest Zcash version 1.0.4 but the system is simply to slow for large scale payments required by the pool. Paying to just 10 timers took between 7 and 15 minutes which is not suitable for paying out thousands of miners in a timely fashion. We will continue to monitor the Zcash developments and evaluate the feasibility with every new Zcash version.
Edit: All tests were done on a dedicated Intel Xeon machine with 32 GB or RAM.
Would it make sense to have an interim step where miners that want z-address payout have to set a payout threshold of at least 5 ZEC or something like that? Just a thought, no biggie either way.
I’m new to zcash mining in flypool. When I mining for almost 4 hours, the total shares that I received more than 500++ shares but why in the Dashboard only shown less than 200 shares in total ?
Where do I find the missing shares ?
Can you investigate why this happen ?
What is flypool has done to encounter this issue where I read in the forum many shares that been mine in this web have been stolen by someone else ?
How do you fix & solutions for this issue that been reported long time back ?
I’m using Claymore v9.3 Beta to mine zcash, please help to solve this issue accordingly ?
Hey peter_zcash, I have a balance on flypool pointed at a Z-Address, I know payouts aren’t working yet for those. Is there a way to switch it to a T-address?
